911 inside job - for what?

[skyeagle409]

So why not release the tapes or are we to go on there word alone.

Go on the evidence because B-757 wreckage inside and outside Pentagon was scattered everywhere. Releasing the video tapes would simply start another conspiracy theory, and that is, the Pentagon videos were doctored by the government, but as I have said, why use videos when the evidence was lying everywhere at the Pentagon.

[The Silver Thong]

Go on the evidence because B-757 wreckage inside and outside Pentagon was scattered everywhere. Releasing the video tapes would simply start another conspiracy theory, and that is, the Pentagon videos were doctored by the government, but as I have said, why use videos when the evidence was lying everywhere at the Pentagon.

Thats a cop out position as there are photos that show little to no wreckage. I think the videos that the fbi have may show evidience being planted.

[skyeagle409]

Thats a cop out position as there are photos that show little to no wreckage. I think the videos that the fbi have may show evidience being planted.

Let's take a look because I have already identified B-757 wreckage at the Pentagon.

#1137

Landing gear wheel visible at the Pentagon

American 77 Wreckage

Flight AA77 on 9/11: New FDR Analysis Supports the Official Flight Path Leading to Impact with the Pentagon

http://journalof911s...ltimeter_92.pdf

American 77 was also tracked to the Pentagon.

If anyone wanted to know what happened to American 77, all they had to do was to ask American Airlines, Boeing Aircraft Co. or go here.

American Airlines, B-757-223, N644AA, (American 77)

Reserved N-Number "Mode S Code" - 52072030

was reserved on 9/15/2006

by Greenway, Jonathan James

PO Box 714

Frederick, Maryland

Deregistered Aircraft

Serial Number 24602

Mfgr - BOEING

MODEL 757-223

Year Manufactured 1991

Reason for Cancellation - Destroyed

Type Registration - Corporation

Certificate Issue Date 05/08/91

Mode S Code 52072030

Cancel Date 01/14/2002

Aircraft registration prior to Deregistration

Wilmington Trust Company Trustee

Rodney Sq North Attn Corp TRT ADM.

Wilmington, Delaware

Airworthyness

Engine Manufacturer ROLLS-ROYC

Engine Model RB.211 Series

Classification Standard

Category Transport

A/W Date 05/08/1991

http://registry.faa....umbertxt=N644AA

Edited December 29, 2013 by skyeagle409

[The Silver Thong]

Let's take a look because I have already identified B-757 wreckage at the Pentagon.

[/size]

So that explains why the fbi will not release the tapes. Not good enough. Your posting exactly what they want you to or what they allow you to.

[skyeagle409]

So that explains why the fbi will not release the tapes.

The FBI does not have to release any video since we already have more than enough evidence that American 77 crashed at the Pentagon.

Your posting exactly what they want you to or what they allow you to.

Which is evidence that American 77 crashed at the Pentagon.

Edited December 29, 2013 by skyeagle409

[The Silver Thong]

The FBI does not have to release any video since we already have more than enough evidence that American 77 crashed at the Pentagon.

Which is evidence that American 77 crashed at the Pentagon.

Ohhhh so they don`t need to release evidience to the public now because they have told you this is all that is needed. I see. Limp....

[skyeagle409]

Ohhhh so they don`t need to release evidience to the public now because they have told you this is all that is needed. I see. Limp....

With tons of B-757 wreckage from American 77 at the Pentagon, no video is required. After all, there was no video pertaining to the crash of PSA 1771, yet a determination was made as to the identity of the aircraft and why it crashed.

Let's take a look at the fleet history of American Airlines.

Link #1

http://www.planespot...erican-Airlines

Link #2

http://www.planespot...2&fleetStatus=8

Link #3

http://www.planespot...an-Airlines.php

Aviation Safety Report on American 77

http://aviation-safe...p?id=20010911-3

Edited December 29, 2013 by skyeagle409

[Stellar]

You are suggesting that there should have been some sort of evidence of surveillance showing the aircraft other than what has already been presented. Given that the aircraft flew in from the direction of the empty field, any such surveillance would have had to be pointing in the direction of that empty field and / or the sky above it, would it not?

What I am stating is that I do believe that there were video cameras on all sides of the pentagon, and that I doubt that a building such as the pentagon has such enormous blind spots in their video surveillance.

So, by the mere suggestion that there had to have been surveillance showing the empty field and the approaching Flight 77, your opinion or position REQUIRES there to be either someone watching that screen or for there to be videotape of what that alleged camera may or may not have allegedly seen. My pointing that out is not putting words in your mouth, although you accusing me of such shows that you haven't thought through your opinion / position very thoroughly.

Perhaps we should review what you wrote? In your attempt to belittle my position, you stated the following:

"You're suggesting that they pay someone to sit and monitor and keep videotaped footage from a camera / cameras focused on an empty field next to a busy highway."

You insinuate that it I state that it would be a single person's sole job to monitor a camera focused on an empty field. That is not my position. That is not something I have stated. My position is simply that there is video surveillance of that side of the pentagon. How that side is monitored I make no claims regarding, but I will suggest that there are more possibilities regarding the method of monitoring than the one you mockingly suggested!

But lets face it, your statement wasn't in any way supposed to clarify or discuss my position, it was an attempt to mock my position by suggesting that its ridiculous to have a single person monitor a camera focused on an empty field, and now you're feeling defensive because I challenged you on it.

However, if you are expecting me to not hold you to any standards of evidence or fair and logical debate based upon the "I'm only presenting my opinion" defense, then please stop taking your lead from BR and don't hypocritically accuse me of fallacies for doing the same as you are.

Perhaps you should hold yourself and your side to the same standard you expect of me. I was simply responding to someone's belief that there are no cameras on that side of the pentagon. Perhaps we should start by holding them to these "standards of evidence" you speak of?

Again, please stop taking your lead from BR and actually learn what the requirements of the Burden of Proof are.

Burden of Proof required that those making the claim against the accepted truth / fact MUST present evidence to support their claim or concede that their claim is baseless, and that the accepted fact / truth requires no defense or further proof or "re-proving". The phrase most commonly used to exemplify the Burden of Proof is "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence / proof"

Accepted Fact: There was no surveillance on the Pentagon that showed Flight 77's approach to and impact into the Pentagon other than what has already been presented.

You want to talk about burden of proof? Fine. Your "accepted fact" is incorrect. It is not an accepted fact. How do I know? Because that's the very "fact" that is in contention! So, we start off from a neutral position. Are there cameras there or aren't there?

So, the question is, are you claiming there is no surveillance on that side of the building? It seems so, since you are already calling it a fact. Now that there is a claim, which you, by the "burden of proof" are required to support!

You can't just sit there and call your position the "accepted fact" and demand all others "prove" theirs. The accepted facts, in this case, are that only one video tape has been released regarding the 9/11 pentagon crash. All other statements are claims.

Extraordinary claim: There must have been other surveillance on the Pentagon that must have shown the aircraft approaching / impacting. The Pentagon is the central hub for the US Military and as such must have an over abundance of surveillance on the exterior. The fact that no other footage showing Flight 77 has surfaced is evidence of / proof of a coverup.

You spoke earlier of "fair and logical debate", yet you attempt to belittle my position by calling my belief in the presence of cameras to be extraordinary? How is anyone supposed to have a fair and logical discussion with you when you act as if it would take an act of god to place cameras on that side of the pentagon? How am I supposed to reason with you if you consider 360 degree surveillance is an "over abundance" of surveillance? Finally, how am I supposed to have a rational debate with you when you continually seem to disregard what I'm stating and instead make-up an argument of your own and attribute it to me? Never have I stated that the lack of other footage is evidence or proof of a cover up. Tell me, Czero, is hyperbole a common debate tactic of yours?

Like it or not, and whinge about it as much as you like, you are required to prove your assertion, where as the Accepted Fact is the Accepted Fact - whether you agree with or not make no difference whatsoever - requires no defense or further proof. Me or someone else showing the obvious flaws in your opinion / or position is not defense of the Accepted Fact, it is merely exposing the shortcomings of an ill-conceived opinion / position.

"Like it or not", I am actually not required to prove anything on this forum, and if you disagree with that, feel free to report my posts to the moderator, and "like it or not", when we are debating a given subject, you can not simply default your position to being the "accepted fact". If your position is such an "accepted fact" then you should have no issue proving it to me, no? So whereas I have never made stated that my opinion is anything other than my opinion (which I do however believe is based on common sense), you have claimed that your position is fact, so now I challenge you to prove it.

If at any point you wish to take a deep breath, step back from the argument you seem to have invested so much into, I would certainly encourage it. It seems both sides of the 9/11 debate have become so entrenched in their positions that the slightest challenge to their deeply embedded belief provokes such a strong "flinch" reaction that any and all calmness, civility, common sense and reason is immediately thrown out the window and the individuals charge, full-tilt, at anything they perceive as having the potential to be their opposition. Often times, they associating the person they are attacking with all sorts of other "claims" have been made in the past, regardless of whether it was the person in question that made them or not. Unsurprisingly, both sides do nothing that amounts to more than claiming they are right, and it is the responsibility of the other side to prove otherwise. It is for this reason I try (sometimes unsuccessfully) not to get involved in these subjects.

[Stellar]

So that explains why the fbi will not release the tapes. Not good enough. Your posting exactly what they want you to or what they allow you to.

I would hazard to guess that they don't release the tapes because its not in their interest to release to the public information on where cameras are located around the pentagon. I would do the same.

[The Silver Thong]

I would hazard to guess that they don't release the tapes because its not in their interest to release to the public information on where cameras are located around the pentagon. I would do the same.

That would be 12 year old info and really where else would they put a new camera, grow a tree or build another gas station to throw off the most logical places to put cameras. Until the videoes are released we know they are doing it to hide evidience of the fact. 86 tapes were taken and 1 with nothing was released.

Skyes little display of what is governemnt released crap is not good enough.

[frenat]

What I am stating is that I do believe that there were video cameras on all sides of the pentagon, and that I doubt that a building such as the pentagon has such enormous blind spots in their video surveillance.

To be most effective, cameras need to be continuously monitored. They are great for retail locations for loss prevention but not so great for large expansive buildings that already have more effective security in the form of armed guards, locked doors, checkpoints, visible ID cards worn at all times, key card and combo access, and vigilant awareness by those who are allowed in looking for those who aren't. All of those individually are far more effective than cameras.

Cameras are more effective at entry points to more secure areas (not outside in the touristy public areas) so those inside the secure areas can see those outside requesting access before they open the door. In my 8 years in the military, at 5 bases in the US and one in the middle East, in multiple Secret and Top Secret areas, those are the only places I saw cameras in use. Even when in use, they were rarely recorded. Armed guards, locked doors, checkpoints, etc. used far more often.

I would hazard to guess that they don't release the tapes because its not in their interest to release to the public information on where cameras are located around the pentagon. I would do the same.

I'd hazard to guess that most of the cameras haven't been released because most people haven't bothered to file a FOIA request for them. The FBI is not in the practice of releasing possible evidence just for the heck of it. That and the list of tapes don't seem to have come from the Pentagon.

http://www.911myths.com/index.php/FBI_hides_84_Pentagon_videos

[frenat]

That would be 12 year old info and really where else would they put a new camera, grow a tree or build another gas station to throw off the most logical places to put cameras. Until the videoes are released we know they are doing it to hide evidience of the fact.

You SUSPECT they are. You don't know.

86 tapes were taken and 1 with nothing was released.

One? One was released from the traffic cam at the Pentagon (though I thought there were two slightly different angles). One was released from the nearby gas station and at least one more from a nearby hotel. Though I don't know why people think that cameras designed to show slow moving traffic on the ground and using slow frame rates to do so should show anything significant regarding a fast moving object from the sky.

Edited December 30, 2013 by frenat

[skyeagle409]

That would be 12 year old info and really where else would they put a new camera, grow a tree or build another gas station to throw off the most logical places to put cameras. Until the videoes are released we know they are doing it to hide evidience of the fact. 86 tapes were taken and 1 with nothing was released.

Skyes little display of what is governemnt released crap is not good enough.

Let's take a look.

* 56 "of these videotapes did not show either the Pentagon building, the Pentagon crash site, or the impact of Flight 77 into the Pentagon on September 11."

* Of the remaining 29 videotapes, 16 "did not show the Pentagon crash site and did not show the impact of Flight 77 into the Pentagon."

* Of the 13 remaining tapes, 12 "only showed the Pentagon after the impact of Flight 77."

* Only one tape showed the Pentagon impact: the Pentagon's own security camera footage, that would later be released.

http://web.archive.o...o/85videos.html

Edited December 30, 2013 by skyeagle409

[Czero 101]

If at any point you wish to take a deep breath, step back from the argument you seem to have invested so much into, I would certainly encourage it. It seems both sides of the 9/11 debate have become so entrenched in their positions that the slightest challenge to their deeply embedded belief provokes such a strong "flinch" reaction that any and all calmness, civility, common sense and reason is immediately thrown out the window and the individuals charge, full-tilt, at anything they perceive as having the potential to be their opposition. Often times, they associating the person they are attacking with all sorts of other "claims" have been made in the past, regardless of whether it was the person in question that made them or not. Unsurprisingly, both sides do nothing that amounts to more than claiming they are right, and it is the responsibility of the other side to prove otherwise. It is for this reason I try (sometimes unsuccessfully) not to get involved in these subjects.

You're right... my apologies... Its for these same reasons that I have kept out of these discussion for some time as well.

Thanks for reminding me.

Cz

Edited December 30, 2013 by Czero 101

[Stellar]

That would be 12 year old info

Yet not outdated.

and really where else would they put a new camera, grow a tree or build another gas station to throw off the most logical places to put cameras.

Unfortunately for you, that reasoning is not enough to declassify something.

Until the videoes are released we know they are doing it to hide evidience of the fact. 86 tapes were taken and 1 with nothing was released.

Actually, that is the opposite of what we "know". We do not know they are doing it to hide evidence. How do we know that?

[Stellar]

To be most effective, cameras need to be continuously monitored. They are great for retail locations for loss prevention but not so great for large expansive buildings that already have more effective security in the form of armed guards, locked doors, checkpoints, visible ID cards worn at all times, key card and combo access, and vigilant awareness by those who are allowed in looking for those who aren't. All of those individually are far more effective than cameras.

While that is true, cameras are still used in conduction with the above in many instances.

Cameras are more effective at entry points to more secure areas (not outside in the touristy public areas) so those inside the secure areas can see those outside requesting access before they open the door. In my 8 years in the military, at 5 bases in the US and one in the middle East, in multiple Secret and Top Secret areas, those are the only places I saw cameras in use. Even when in use, they were rarely recorded. Armed guards, locked doors, checkpoints, etc. used far more often.

Ive seen cameras in many locations as well, and one of the common themes is that they did have them all around buildings, regardless of whether it was an official access route or not.

I'd hazard to guess that most of the cameras haven't been released because most people haven't bothered to file a FOIA request for them. The FBI is not in the practice of releasing possible evidence just for the heck of it. That and the list of tapes don't seem to have come from the Pentagon.

http://www.911myths....Pentagon_videos

That is also a possibility.

[Stellar]

You're right... my apologies... Its for these same reasons that I have kept out of these discussion for some time as well.

Thanks for reminding me.

Cz

My apologies as well if I came off rude.

[Babe Ruth]

Yes, it would certainly be too much of a burden for the government to release helpful videos WITHOUT such an FOIA request....

[skyeagle409]

Yes, it would certainly be too much of a burden for the government to release helpful videos WITHOUT such an FOIA request....

Considering the video already released, which depicts American 77 in the background, no other video is required, but, with B-757 wreckage all over the grounds of the Pentagon, FDR data. and the announcement from American Airlines confirming that American 77 had crashed at the Pentagon, no video is required to determine the B-757 that crashed at the Pentagon was American 77.

We have a number of videos of American 11 and United 175 slamming into the WTC buildings yet some 9/11 conspiracist continue to insist that no aircraft struck those buildings.

[Babe Ruth]

You might consider getting your spectacles adjusted Sky. There's no Boeing in that picture. There is something in that picture, maybe a Soviet Granit provided by Viktor Bout, but it ain't no Boeing.

Best make an appointment with your optician.

[skyeagle409]

You might consider getting your spectacles adjusted Sky.

I shouild know because the B-757 is one of my favorite aircraft.

There's no Boeing in that picture.

Let's take a look.

Apparently, you haven't been around aircraft very much if at all nor familiar with aircraft recognition techniques and you tried to convince people you are a pilot?! Best make an appointment with your optician.

[DONTEATUS]

I guess we could ask BR to Tell us just what it was that went into the Pentagon ! Fil in the Blanks Y`all Happy New Year ! Skynet is just about up and running !

[jimrich]

On 1/11/2013 at 5:48 PM, redhen said:

For those who hold that 911 was an inside job, I would like to discover why you believe those responsible would have executed this plan.

I can only think of one possible reason that might make sense; to launch a war, to give the armed forces combat experience.

You go.

Thanks

Well, just like the stunt at Pearl Harbor, it was done to make some of us mad enough to go to war which puts more $$$ and power into the greedy hands of the Super Rich Rulers who have been secretly running things for 1000s of years.  It was an act of greed for MORE POWER & CONTROL and they got it!  So, now that you know, what are you going to do about it?  What are you going to do to stop the Rulers from staging more and more murderous stunts go gain more and more POWER & CONTROL?

As for me, I'm just going to live my life the best I can and let the Rulers go their own way as they always have and always will.  They the $$$ and Power - for now anyway.

[aquatus1]

You may want to check the date and time of the last post prior to adding something.

[jimrich]

3 hours ago, aquatus1 said:

You may want to check the date and time of the last post prior to adding something.

Is there a rule concerning when a response is timely?  You may want to turn off the "reply to this topic" function.